Recent posts on this site have explored the flimsy analytical foundation for the Afghanistan War. The theories of the war’s advocates are supported neither by obvious facts nor a firm body of expert opinion.
There is another dimension to this. The pro-war comments are this site have become increasingly delusional over the past 4 years. Really disturbing. This is speculation — just guessing — but I believe this shows what 8 years of war have done to America. We’re locked into a seemingly endless war (as described here), whose costs exceed any likely benefit. As so often happens, this rots our minds.
To call this “madness” is an exaggeration, the phenomenon is a historical commonplace. WWI is the classic example. The original aims were quickly made obsolete by events. The blood and treasure spent made backing down impossible. Madness was the result.
The big lie
The primary justification given for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan remain 9-11, with frequent mentions of WWII. The connection is never explained between these events and the invasion of Iraq and the current war against the Pasthun tribes of Afghanistan. The enemy is just “evil” and “bad guys.” Here is one examples.
“Yeah we had to look REAL hard for the “other evil” after Pearl Harbor and 9/11. The evil kept getting closer in proximity until their attacks on our soil made it impossible to ignore.” (sfmac, here)
The big lies about Iraq — Saddam’s connection with al Qaeda and possession of WMD’s — have been disproven. Through repetition, much of the public remains convinced of a connection between the current war against the Pashtun people (or the Tailiban) and 9-11. It is nonsense, as discussed in An expert explains why we must fight in Afghanistan.
A poem about the wonders of the Iraq War
Here is a recent comment by Tom Grey. He has a long train of comments on the FM site, which show him to be both intelligent and reasonably well-informed.
Tom’s blog is Liberty Dad, “a world without dictators.” Tom describes himself as “a libertarian paternalist – progressive Conservative. I want lots of choices for people, with very responsible oriented defaults. Political, smaller government oriented, pro- Christian with tolerance and against changes reducing Christian influence.” His advocacy of foreign wars seems odd for a libertarian.
I have inserted replies into the text.
From comment #13 to A wonderful discussion about the American Empire.
Sorry FM, love your site, and it does seem true that that US free markets/ free people/ capitalism (inevitably corrupt and cronyistic)/ human rights … have been imposed by us “doing it largely by killing.” However, ALL rule, throughout history, has been imposed by the rulers, “largely by killing.”
FM: Is this what we’ve become, imposing our way of life on other nations by killing? I doubt that many Americans today would agree with this chilling view. We have fought wars against folks who have done this, wars which we considered just.
In particular, in my own lifetime, the anti-war folk won the political battle about Vietnam after Nixon’s 1973 Paris Peace Treaty. What followed the success of the anti-war withdrawal of funding for our corrupt but capitalistic S. Viet allies? Hundreds of thousands of boat people fleeing the Soviet commie sponsored N. Viet rulers, taking over “largely by killing” in far greater numbers. Killing in far greater numbers than in 1973.
FM: What’s the point here? We fought for a decade in South Vietnam; should we still be fighting there? Millions, perhaps tens of millions have died in wars since WWII. Should we have sent our troops to fight and die in all of them?
In Cambodia, China commie sponsored Khmer Rhouge rulers took over “largely by killing” — 25% of the people. You and most of your anti-war commenters fail to compare the US supported rulers and their killings, to the anti-US rulers and theirs. In fact, in Iraq the anti-US terrorist murders are usually wrongly added to the deaths the US is considered responsible for.
FM: Is there any war that Tom does not think we should have entered? If we followed Tom’s plan, imagine how many tens of thousands of America troops would have been killed fighting around the world. Such as in Africa (e.g., the Congo, Sudan). Are we responsible for the world, the wisest all-powerful king of nations?
Your far stronger point is the cost in cash that the US is paying for doing mediocre occupation / nation building in Iraq. But most anti-war folk don’t really care about the costs, except as a way to show how they’re right to be anti-war … and every death or problem is used likewise as a club in an attempt to win the ‘we were right to be anti-war’ argument. And most pro-Iraqi Freedom folk, even if they do care about the costs, get sidetracked on the above death/ moral issues of how American killers kill far fewer than the anti-American killers do.
FM: Here he displays telepathic powers, explaing what “most anti-war” people think. Again, what’s the point of this?
“{T}he key assumption is” that patriotic Americans really belivethe Declaration: that all men are created equal, and endowed by their Creator with the inalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
FM: Where does he get this nonsense? The Constitution is the defining document of America.
- Almost every office-holder in the USA pledges, in the words of Article I Section 2, to ” preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
- The oath of citizenship says “I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…”
Neither mentions the poetry of the Declaration. To give just two examples of why this is so, Americans need not believe in a Creator, let along that we have any inalienable rights. As Robert Heinlein wrote in his novel “Starship Troopers”:
Life? What “right” to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What “right” to life has a man who must die if he is to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of “right”?
If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man’s right is “unalienable”? And is it “right”?
As to liberty, the heroes who signed the great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called natural human rights that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost.
“‘The third “right”?–the “pursuit of happiness”? It is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can “pursue happiness” as long as my brain lives–but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can insure that I will catch it.’
Now, back to Tom.
And we patriots really believe that most Iraqi people, if living in a fairly secure, free society, will want democracy. Enough to fight for, die for — kill for.
FM: This is odd in several ways.
- Tom is probably guessing, as I doubt he knows much about the Iraq peoples.
- What is this “we patriots”? How does he define “patriots”? How does he know what other patriots believe?
- It is irrelevant. What do dreams of the Iraq people have to do with us?
- Tom ignores (or perhaps does not know) that that Iraq’s is a civil war. They are fighting and killing each other; few or none are doing so in the name of “democracy.”
Tom’s friends can buy him a rifle, ammo, and airfare to Iraq. I’ll wish him good luck (and double luck to the Iraq peoples, as an uninvited foreigner with a gun usually spells b-a-d-n-e-w-s).
“…he won the war by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country” GC Scott as Patton.
FM: This is mind-bendingly irrelevant. He does not even attempt to connect this with the Iraq War. Also, Patton never said this.
Afterword
Please share your comments by posting below. Per the FM site’s Comment Policy, please make them brief (250 words max), civil, and relevant to this post. Or email me at fabmaximus at hotmail dot com (note the spam-protected spelling).
For information about this site see the About page, at the top of the right-side menu bar.
For more information from the FM site
To read other articles about these things, see the FM reference page on the right side menu bar. Of esp interest these days:
- About America’s national defence strategy and machinery
- About Iraq & Sub-continent Wars – my articles
- About Iraq & Sub-continent Wars – studies & reports
